WHO SAID YOU COULD DO THIS..........?

Here is a meme from the Orstrayin Gummint.........

........... note that it lists 4 Purposes for its Migration Policy. One of those purposes is to "Reshape Society". Excuse me, Mr. Gummint, who the bluddyhell gave you permission to reshape our society? [The answer will be suggested at the end of this rant].

With the recent release of statistics from the 2016 census it can be seen that the gummint has done a bluddy good job of it - reshaping our society and changing our culture! That was the Euro-Caucasian culture that developed and defended the nation, built the physical infrastructure as well as building the prevailing ethos, laws, inventions, characteristics, identity and idiosyncrasies which have formed the unique Australian narrative. Isn't it good enough? Is it too White? Too Christian? Too patriarchal? Are we burdened by some past sins for which our collective guilt must be assuaged and repented of?

Here is some of your handywork......"Australians were born in close to 200 different countries – meaning people from all over the world are part of our diverse nation.
With more than 300 languages spoken in our homes (including Auslan – Australian Sign Language), more than 100 religions and more than 300 different ancestries," 

Here is our make-up now .......... 
• English (36.1%)
• Australian (33.5%)
• Irish (11.0%)
• Scottish (9.3%)
• Chinese (5.6%)
• Italian (4.6%)
• German (4.5%)
• Indian (2.8%)
• Greek (1.8%)
• Dutch (1.6%)

So, Australians are now a minority in our own country. And it's noticeable when one walks around various suburbs which have a majority of either Chinese, Indians or Middle-Easterners. Because of the latter group - you know, the Quranic hate group - we are now unwelcome in their areas, especially even dangerous if you happen to be wearing a cross, a Jewish skull cap, a Trump badge or a short skirt. But apparently the gummint believe all cultures are relative and diversity is to our benefit. Only one politician had the guts to say "not all cultures are equal", but he got the Brutus knife.

Who are these faceless social engineers that decided to "Shape Society"? Let me guess: would they be the political and social science professors who have steeped themselves in the Frankfurt School philosophy for the last 50 years and got into the ears of political leaders?

The people wouldn't have to be asked if they favored immigration to complement a negative population growth, or to supply specialist trades and occupations - that's common sense. But deliberately importing anti-cultures? Sub-cultural barbarians? Non-whites simply because they are non-white? What the hell were you thinking if you were not trying to destroy our Western Christian Culture?

Where did this mandate come from? Dear Leaders, did we have a referendum? did you receive a multitude of letters? were there public meetings? activist marches? water-cooler opinions? were we demanding that we had to become different because we weren't happy with who we are? I will tell you what I, for one, know about Diversity. Diversity is good to a point but uncontrolled and unconditional it is self-defeating. Take it to the Village level. Stock the village with 3 dogs and 3 bitches, all of various and specialized breeds, herders, heelers, hunters, retrievers etc. What you will get in a few generations are mobs of mongrels that look the same and behave the same.

THE ANSWER to my question: "Who said you could do this......?"

Unfortunately, when a population gives itself over to neomodernism and materialism it tends not to propagate beyond replacement level of 2.1 children per family. Immigration is necessary and brought about by the short-sightedness of its own citizens. As for the gummints' mandate....... this is a democracy with free voting, thus we got what we voted for. Voters have every chance to pre-question candidates and opportunity to voice opinions post elections. "Who said you could do this.....?" I think that it is 'we' who tacitly did.

New York Times Bags Aussie Culture.

There's this raw prawn goes by the monika of Damien Cave[dweller] who reckons our culture is in short supply. Here's what he said......

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/14/world/australia/nytaustralia14-art-sydney-melbourne-victoria-market-fall-and-rise-of-australian-culture.html?rref=collection%2Fseriescollection%2Fnyt-australia-newsletter&_r=0

Anyways, I found that by reading a rag called the Daily Review which comes out weekly, obviously. So here's that piece.......

https://dailyreview.com.au/new-york-times-australian-culture/61126/


Righto, so what I'm gunna do is send that moron at the New York Times some examples of Aussie culture that he is obviously ignorant about that has evolved from our humble beginnings over 200 years.

Here y'are Mister Damien Cave Dweller...... get some fair dinkum culture into ya...........

And a fine example of our munlticulturalism.........

As well as all-gender inclusive ...........

And finally, an example of perhaps our finest opera star.........Showing orf the best of our cuisine:

So, cop that lot Mister Cave Dweller.

TROOFERS.......... YOU'RE BUSTED!!

A Special Project on behalf of the facebook page, Speak freely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many sites and You Tubers published so-called evidence of a false flag attack relating to the recent London Bridge Islamic attack. I take a passing interest in such things and acknowledge that many such occurrences are suspicious, however a site that I happen to like a lot promulgated this event as a false flag. The video evidence was shallow and rather puerile in my opinion and I gave my point of view which didn't go down well with the site's fans who seemed to be devotees of conspiracy theories. I sympathize, I really do, since we plebs need to fight back against the elites, the puppet-masters and the Deep State, but phony evidence is not a valid defense and we must do better in seeking truth.

Here then is that so-called evidence which was posted on one of my fav sites [and it needs to be viewed for the rest of my argument to be kept in context]......

There were lots of problems that I had with this 'evidence'.

The tables and glasses section is fatuous, so I will omit comment and concentrate on the well-posted part of the police getting changed. My problems here are with the You Tuber who hasn't bothered to research police uniforms - and this is easily discovered and would conclude that white shirts and dark pants are standard. Second, he has not bothered to do due diligent discovery on such MET units as the Flying Squad or the Counter Terrorist Command. Third, any sophisticated covert operation would not see police getting changed in public outside their van in full view of several people with cameras. Fourth, there is no date and time stamp clear on the video. Fifth, why is there not longer vision - has it been cropped to fit his narrative? Then we come to the substitution of the camo-panted policeman for the terrorist, which is sixth - anyone can see that the body types are different. But then, while the clothing seems to match, it actually doesn't according to a video of the three terrorists running along the road on their rampage. The supposedly substituted terrorist has a light blue sleeved tee shirt which is visible in the video of his dead body - but the policeman was not wearing one. [That video can be found on You Tube].

Then there is the innocent bystander who was attacked and ran off with the police car rolling on. So what?, that's explainable. But, no, I can't explain the lack of flash from 50 rounds fired off, the lack of smoke or the lack of blood - but I'm not a forensic expert. Maybe that's down to the lighting, the types of weapons etc., but for me it is enough to catch this You Tuber out in a lie to debunk his whole premise.

So, in my research, up comes a related video. And I post that now to explain the deception used by this, and other, Troofers............

Before this jihad attack there was the bomber at Manchester and the conspiracy of the false flag nature of that as posted on many sites was even less credible, but I won't go into that. Yes, there are staged events and psy-ops, e.g. I do believe that I was the first Australian poster to expose the White Helmets, which I did in a parody blog post since I had no solid proof, only suspicions which I stuck my neck out for. Subsequently the proof came in to support my post.

The lesson in this is to discern the truth with analysis that basically relies on research and common sense. Looking stupid does not help the cause for those of us who try to fight back against our controllers.

For anyone interested, my post on the White Helmets can be read here........
https://johnnamnik.wordpress.com/2016/09/30/the-white-hellmutts/

The Papal Climate.

[re-posted from 2 years ago].........

Let me say who it was that Francis called in to advise him in the meeting that preceded and led to this encyclical: Ban Ki-Moon, U.N. Chief, and Jeffrey Sachs, a guy called Stiglitz with some influence from Christiana Figueres. The last three are either members of Socialist International and/or communists, while all are pushers of depopulation by abortion, and campaign for free, easy killing of the unborn. A Pope supposedly upholds the dictum that mankind is made in the image of God; his advisors see man as the enemy of Gaia, the Earth Godess. While filthy rich themselves, they advocate high taxes on the middle-class to be given to save the earth and the poor. [How has that all gone in North Korea, Russia, Cuba etc?.] Throw in influence of George Soros and Google them all, if you haven’t heard of them.

As if Francis wasn’t already under a cloud for his suspect support of the evil Junta rule in Argentina and his sacking of fellow priests who ministered to the poor. Now, in this papal letter, he falls for the BS around the imminent supposed catastrophe of climate Armageddon. At least he attributes climate change [which is real], to both natural as well as human activity. But wham! he makes the cardinal error of calling CO2 a pollutant. For a man on a mission to stand up for the poor, Francis comes out against coal, which is the only way that a billion or so of the world’s population who have NO electricity, could possibly afford to acquire power. [The campaign against coal is fraught with propaganda, but is a subject for another day].

Secular humanists, anti-lifers, eco-alarmists, pessimists, atheists, One-World Govt enthusiasts and those who would subvert our sovereignty will all employ this encyclical to support their agendas.